The right to vote is often considered sacrosanct in democratic societies. That so many fail to exercise their right suggests that it is often taken for granted. In other societies, the ability to vote is either absent entirely or heavily circumscribed by actors seeking to dissuade voters or to outright halt an election. As an illustration of the latter, The Independent featured the tragic story of Lal Mohammed, an Afghan farmer who recently attempted to defy a Taliban-issued order to boycott the Presidential elections in Afghanistan. Mohammed encountered three 'Talibs' while he was about 30 minutes into his 90 minute walking trek to cast his vote. As the Talibs searched his person, they found his electoral registration papers. They became immediately furious and began to beat him. The assault culminated in Mohammed's ears and nose being sliced away.
This is a harsh reminder of the power that non-state actors have in promoting and enforcing certain norms in spite of a legitimate but vulnerable authority that is unable to assert effective control through the territorial space that it theoretically controls. Although the Taliban is neither the de jure nor de facto government throughout Afghanistan as they once were prior to the NATO invasion in 2001 (precipitated by the 9/11 attacks), they still hold considerable coercive power and the ability to enforce their diktat in certain portions of the country. Thus the act of seeking to vote in an election is very much an act of defiance against the "law" promulgated and enforced by the Taliban in certain sections of the Afghan state. As Lal Mohammed's story illustrates, there may be severe consequences for this type of resistance. Indeed, unless sufficient protection can be provided against such lawless acts and other types of violence, any attempted promotion of universal suffrage will likely lead to the Taliban's efforts in suppressing electoral participation.
Source:
Kim Sengupta, "Mutilated - for voting in defiance of the Taliban" The Independent, 31 August, 2009. Online: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/mutilated-ndash-for-voting-in-defiance-of-the-taliban-1779627.html
This is a harsh reminder of the power that non-state actors have in promoting and enforcing certain norms in spite of a legitimate but vulnerable authority that is unable to assert effective control through the territorial space that it theoretically controls. Although the Taliban is neither the de jure nor de facto government throughout Afghanistan as they once were prior to the NATO invasion in 2001 (precipitated by the 9/11 attacks), they still hold considerable coercive power and the ability to enforce their diktat in certain portions of the country. Thus the act of seeking to vote in an election is very much an act of defiance against the "law" promulgated and enforced by the Taliban in certain sections of the Afghan state. As Lal Mohammed's story illustrates, there may be severe consequences for this type of resistance. Indeed, unless sufficient protection can be provided against such lawless acts and other types of violence, any attempted promotion of universal suffrage will likely lead to the Taliban's efforts in suppressing electoral participation.
Source:
Kim Sengupta, "Mutilated - for voting in defiance of the Taliban" The Independent, 31 August, 2009. Online: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/mutilated-ndash-for-voting-in-defiance-of-the-taliban-1779627.html
No comments:
Post a Comment